Posting / compose form layout #9726

Open
opened 3 months ago by Freeplay · 62 comments
Collaborator

Quick rough mockups

image

image

I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline

Also have to remember that the posting form can be a widget in the sidebar, which is a lot smaller. And is kind of why I'm prefering the second image. And it should be easier to add stuff like a language selector next to the visibility selector without having it crammed in

If anyone has any suggestions, please tell


Linking related issues:
#9411

Quick rough mockups ![image](/attachments/6deec976-e9c8-46a5-b163-e1cba2132419) ![image](/attachments/58a9656a-445f-42be-b925-0b76ba9ff8b3) I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline Also have to remember that the posting form can be a widget in the sidebar, which is a lot smaller. And is kind of why I'm prefering the second image. And it should be easier to add stuff like a language selector next to the visibility selector without having it crammed in If anyone has any suggestions, please tell --- Linking related issues: https://codeberg.org/calckey/calckey/issues/9411
Freeplay self-assigned this 3 months ago
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

I think that the second mockup takes up more space for buttons for no particular reason (3 lines of buttons instead of 2, leaving bigger empty spaces and taking up space from the actual posting area). As for the widget, we could just leave the current way to display visibility there (just the icon) and make the change only in the default compose box, when you press Post.

I think that the second mockup takes up more space for buttons for no particular reason (3 lines of buttons instead of 2, leaving bigger empty spaces and taking up space from the actual posting area). As for the widget, we could just leave the current way to display visibility there (just the icon) and make the change only in the default compose box, when you press Post.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Oh and I also wanna suggest changing the "preview" icon to "Binoculars" (current icon used is called "Code" and isn't very descriptive imo)

Oh and I also wanna suggest changing the "preview" icon to "Binoculars" (current icon used is called "Code" and isn't very descriptive imo)
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Unusable areas in both variations with red:

image

Unusable areas in both variations with red: ![image](/attachments/a2dbbe54-9187-4918-8890-4e9a4f9856d1)
376 KiB
Poster
Collaborator

Maybe we could use the first one, but in the smaller compose box,
the buttons could wrap to a new row at the bottom like:

Visibility selector | Character count | Help button | Post button

Maybe we could use the first one, but in the smaller compose box, the buttons could wrap to a new row at the bottom like: Visibility selector | Character count | Help button | Post button
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Maybe we could use the first one, but in the smaller compose box,
the buttons could wrap to a new row at the bottom like:

Visibility selector | Character count | Help button | Post button

Yep! Or to make them a little more consistent, perhaps in the widget we could fit "User" and Visibility at the top, and move Preview | Character count | Help button | Post button to the bottom.
Or we could put "Preview" at the bottom and next to "Post" in both versions, it might make more sense there anyway, since the preview appears at the bottom, and sort of like a last check before hitting Post.

> Maybe we could use the first one, but in the smaller compose box, > the buttons could wrap to a new row at the bottom like: > > Visibility selector | Character count | Help button | Post button Yep! Or to make them a little more consistent, perhaps in the widget we could fit "User" and Visibility at the top, and move Preview | Character count | Help button | Post button to the bottom. Or we could put "Preview" at the bottom and next to "Post" in both versions, it might make more sense there anyway, since the preview appears at the bottom, and sort of like a last check before hitting Post.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Not sure about this one, but for the sake of brainstorming, and since you seem to want to put visibility at the bottom:
image

And also, after giving it some more thought, I think that in the widget, space is more of the essence, so maybe we could avoid a third line by using the avatar only for the user selector, like it is now, instead of the longer one here? This would probably mean that the sketch in this post could be feasible in the widget width as well.

Not sure about this one, but for the sake of brainstorming, and since you seem to want to put visibility at the bottom: ![image](/attachments/79cf8a1a-e4d9-4a23-aa6c-37af4ea13d23) And also, after giving it some more thought, I think that in the widget, space is more of the essence, so maybe we could avoid a third line by using the avatar only for the user selector, like it is now, instead of the longer one here? This would probably mean that the sketch in this post could be feasible in the widget width as well.
Poster
Collaborator

Having those buttons at the top doesn't seem too great...

Having those buttons at the top doesn't seem too great...
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Nope, bad idea, the current bottom row should stay at the bottom because it has popups that would otherwise cover the posting/text area.

Nope, bad idea, the current bottom row should stay at the bottom because it has popups that would otherwise cover the posting/text area.
Poster
Collaborator

I kind like that bottom bar also though (with the visibility selector and posting button in the same row), if we do something that I do still think it would be better having the buttons row sitting on top of that

I personally don't see an issue with the extra row, it's not like it's being stuck to the top or bottom of the screen or anything like that

I kind like that bottom bar also though (with the visibility selector and posting button in the same row), if we do something that I do still think it would be better having the buttons row sitting on top of that I personally don't see an issue with the extra row, it's not like it's being stuck to the top or bottom of the screen or anything like that

First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box?

First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box?
Poster
Collaborator

First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box?

You can have multiple accounts logged in, and clicking the pfp lets you switch between the account posting. Just thought it would be easier to differentiate which account you're on

> First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box? You can have multiple accounts logged in, and clicking the pfp lets you switch between the account posting. Just thought it would be easier to differentiate which account you're on
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box?

Because it's also a user selector! Which even I didn't know until recently, after using Calckey for months, because it doesn't give any indicators currently...

> First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box? Because it's also a user selector! Which even I didn't know until recently, after using Calckey for months, because it doesn't give any indicators currently...

Keeping the account names in the dropdown menu, but adding an indicator for it (like those "/" in the mockups) would be enough for me to show that you can switch the account, but not for others I guess

Keeping the account names in the dropdown menu, but adding an indicator for it (like those "\/" in the mockups) would be enough for me to show that you can switch the account, but not for others I guess

First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box?

Because it's also a user selector! Which even I didn't know until recently, after using Calckey for months, because it doesn't give any indicators currently...

And at least it's more discoverable in your proposal.

I wonder if that could be outside of the compose box, like a floating box above/next to the compose pop-up, that would only be shown if you have multiple accounts (and then a list of avatars could be shown ?) ?
Something that would save space.

> > First one seems fine to me, but I don't see the reason for your username and display name to be on the compose box? > > Because it's also a user selector! Which even I didn't know until recently, after using Calckey for months, because it doesn't give any indicators currently... And at least it's more discoverable in your proposal. I wonder if that could be outside of the compose box, like a floating box above/next to the compose pop-up, that would only be shown if you have multiple accounts (and then a list of avatars could be shown ?) ? Something that would save space.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Keeping the account names in the dropdown menu, but adding an indicator for it (like those "/" in the mockups) would be enough for me to show that you can switch the account, but not for others I guess

hmm something like that maybe, when you have multiple accounts logged in?

image

It would still be heaps more visible than the current layout, which only shows the avatar and you have to click on it to discover that it's actually a selector.

> Keeping the account names in the dropdown menu, but adding an indicator for it (like those "\/" in the mockups) would be enough for me to show that you can switch the account, but not for others I guess hmm something like that maybe, when you have multiple accounts logged in? ![image](/attachments/20f20825-32e2-413f-ac24-44838639d1cc) It would still be heaps more visible than the current layout, which only shows the avatar and you have to click on it to discover that it's actually a selector.
147 KiB
panos added the
✨Feature
🖥️Client
labels 3 months ago
panos added this to the Future improvements project 3 months ago
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Another tiny change:

image

Took Character Count back to the top (where it currently is), moved Preview next to Post, think it might make more sense there, as explained above.

Another tiny change: ![image](/attachments/10b012b7-349f-4a5a-ad7c-08fd04efd3b0) Took Character Count back to the top (where it currently is), moved Preview next to Post, think it might make more sense there, as explained above.
146 KiB
panos added the
💬Discussion
label 3 months ago
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners:

image

Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners: ![image](/attachments/7ca0203b-775a-4188-91af-2f2b75a305fc)
146 KiB
Poster
Collaborator

I think it being spread out looked better

I think it being spread out looked better
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

BTW, the current settings are:
Global - Your post will be visible to all users
Home - Post to home timeline only
Followers - Make visible to your followers only
Direct - Make visible for specified users

If we're changing Global to "Visible in All Timelines", it doesn't really say the whole story - Followers posts are also visible in all timelines, but for followers only. Also, Home visibility also displays posts in Social, which could confuse users - perhaps "Not visible in Local and Global timelines" would be more accurate (it couldn't appear in Recommended anyway).

So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions? Maybe something like:

"Public post, visible in all timelines"
"Public post, not visible in local and global timelines"
"Visible to your followers only, in all timelines"
"Visible to specified users"

BTW, the current settings are: Global - Your post will be visible to all users Home - Post to home timeline only Followers - Make visible to your followers only Direct - Make visible for specified users If we're changing Global to "Visible in All Timelines", it doesn't really say the whole story - Followers posts are also visible in all timelines, but for followers only. Also, Home visibility also displays posts in Social, which could confuse users - perhaps "Not visible in Local and Global timelines" would be more accurate (it couldn't appear in Recommended anyway). So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions? Maybe something like: "Public post, visible in all timelines" "Public post, not visible in local and global timelines" "Visible to your followers only, in all timelines" "Visible to specified users"

Took Character Count back to the top

I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ?

Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners:

I believe it reduces the heaviness and improves the readability, allowing also to detach -visually and within the margin of error of touch- the X button to close the window (and loose all content ?)

Home - Post to home timeline only
Followers - Make visible to your followers only
Direct - Make visible for specified users only

I believe it's clearer like this, and also more consistent. Not sure it's needed.

If we're changing Global to "Visible in All Timelines", it doesn't really say the whole story - Followers posts are also visible in all timelines, but for followers only.

👍

So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions?

In my opinion that would be a nice way to improve clarity and give users an hint while not creating too much clutter.

> Took Character Count back to the top I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ? > Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners: I believe it reduces the heaviness and improves the readability, allowing also to detach -visually and within the margin of error of touch- the X button to close the window (and loose all content ?) > Home - Post to home timeline only Followers - Make visible to your followers only Direct - Make visible for specified users **only** I believe it's clearer like this, and also more consistent. Not sure it's needed. > If we're changing Global to "Visible in All Timelines", it doesn't really say the whole story - Followers posts are also visible in all timelines, but for followers only. 👍 > So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions? In my opinion that would be a nice way to improve clarity and give users an hint while not creating too much clutter.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Took Character Count back to the top

I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ?

No, that's not an issue - try writing a long post! The compose box doesn't get longer as more lines are added, it stays the specified size (you can make it longer, but there's really no reason to make it longer than the screen, so the character count always stays on-screen). This is where it is today and I think it hasn't been a problem.
Having Preview next to Post also makes sense, and this was a good choice by Misskey - except the Post button makes more sense at the lower right corner. But if we want to move it there, I think we should move Preview with it. That's why on second thought I suggested keeping the count above, and moving Preview below. It's the last check before you post, it makes sense to have it at the left of the Post button.

> > Took Character Count back to the top > > I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ? No, that's not an issue - try writing a long post! The compose box doesn't get longer as more lines are added, it stays the specified size (you can make it longer, but there's really no reason to make it longer than the screen, so the character count always stays on-screen). This is where it is today and I think it hasn't been a problem. Having Preview next to Post also makes sense, and this was a good choice by Misskey - except the Post button makes more sense at the lower right corner. But if we want to move it there, I think we should move Preview with it. That's why on second thought I suggested keeping the count above, and moving Preview below. It's the last check before you post, it makes sense to have it at the left of the Post button.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners:

I believe it reduces the heaviness and improves the readability, allowing also to detach -visually and within the margin of error of touch- the X button to close the window (and loose all content ?)

Yeah, the more I look at all the options, the more I think that from a UX point of view it's probably better this way. BTW you don't lose content when you accidentally hit X, if you press Post again then it has kept what you had written, but still, I think that users tend to not look at the upper right corner that much in a box like this, better to keep stuff at the left if possible, where you start typing. So, so far I think I'm more inclined to the last one, this seems like the cleanest/most practical setup, but the previous one would probably also be fine. Having buttons in all corners may make it appear more balanced visually, but it's more practical to not have them spread out that much.

Actually, just checked what facebook does, and they've also kept the upper right corner empty, except for the X:
image

> > Or we could align the top row to the left like this, so that we don't spread everything out in all four corners: > > I believe it reduces the heaviness and improves the readability, allowing also to detach -visually and within the margin of error of touch- the X button to close the window (and loose all content ?) Yeah, the more I look at all the options, the more I think that from a UX point of view it's probably better this way. BTW you don't lose content when you accidentally hit X, if you press Post again then it has kept what you had written, but still, I think that users tend to not look at the upper right corner that much in a box like this, better to keep stuff at the left if possible, where you start typing. So, so far I think I'm more inclined to the last one, this seems like the cleanest/most practical setup, but the previous one would probably also be fine. Having buttons in all corners may make it appear more balanced visually, but it's more practical to not have them spread out that much. Actually, just checked what facebook does, and they've also kept the upper right corner empty, except for the X: ![image](/attachments/a7853fe8-e987-4ac4-80fc-bd3cf19c089b)
166 KiB
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner:

image

So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions?

In my opinion that would be a nice way to improve clarity and give users an hint while not creating too much clutter.

Actually, right now we only have an icon for visibility. Perhaps a middle solution (because having the full description about timelines makes it a little heavy) would be to keep the icon, and also have a button that says "Visibility:". Then have the details about timelines etc in the options of the drop down menu. That would probably be enough to draw the attention of users - I mean it's an icon and it says Visibility, if you care about visibility options for your post just click it. Having just the icon like now may make it pass unnoticable (it's one of several icons, some users don't wanna do an investigation on every icon), but if it said Visibility, I think it would probably be good enough.

On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner: ![image](/attachments/50b7f05a-b932-45f4-b4f9-42693e749591) >>So, perhaps when you open the menu it gives more detailed desciptions? > >In my opinion that would be a nice way to improve clarity and give users an hint while not creating too much clutter. Actually, right now we only have an icon for visibility. Perhaps a middle solution (because having the full description about timelines makes it a little heavy) would be to keep the icon, and also have a button that says "Visibility:". Then have the details about timelines etc in the options of the drop down menu. That would probably be enough to draw the attention of users - I mean it's an icon and it says Visibility, if you care about visibility options for your post just click it. Having just the icon like now may make it pass unnoticable (it's one of several icons, some users don't wanna do an investigation on every icon), but if it said Visibility, I think it would probably be good enough.
147 KiB

Took Character Count back to the top

I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ?

No, that's not an issue - try writing a long post! The compose box doesn't get longer as more lines are added, it stays the specified size (you can make it longer, but there's really no reason to make it longer than the screen, so the character count always stays on-screen). This is where it is today and I think it hasn't been a problem

Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅

Having Preview next to Post also makes sense

I agree with this.

It's the last check before you post, it makes sense to have it at the left of the Post button.

👍

On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner:

image

Looks neat and clear like that imho.

> > > Took Character Count back to the top > > > > I'm not sure it's the best move, as when writing a long post, you probably mostly write at the bottom, if you have to look above (or scroll on phones) to check the character limit, maybe it's not optimal ? > > No, that's not an issue - try writing a long post! The compose box doesn't get longer as more lines are added, it stays the specified size (you can make it longer, but there's really no reason to make it longer than the screen, so the character count always stays on-screen). This is where it is today and I think it hasn't been a problem Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅 > > Having Preview next to Post also makes sense I agree with this. > It's the last check before you post, it makes sense to have it at the left of the Post button. 👍 > > On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner: > > ![image](/attachments/50b7f05a-b932-45f4-b4f9-42693e749591) Looks neat and clear like that imho.

I think that users tend to not look at the upper right corner that much in a box like this, better to keep stuff at the left if possible, where you start typin

Yes, and the top right corner is widely used for more particular commands such as closing the window.

Having buttons in all corners may make it appear more balanced visually

Or more overloaded, with no visual resting space. And like that it's easy to see instantly that "there is nothing useful here when writing" rather than having to interpret a list of icons.

Perhaps a middle solution (because having the full description about timelines makes it a little heavy) would be to keep the icon, and also have a button that says "Visibility:". Then have the details about timelines etc in the options of the drop down menu. That would probably be enough to draw the attention of users - I mean it's an icon and it says Visibility, if you care about visibility options for your post just click it. Having just the icon like now may make it pass unnoticable

👍

> I think that users tend to not look at the upper right corner that much in a box like this, better to keep stuff at the left if possible, where you start typin Yes, and the top right corner is widely used for more particular commands such as closing the window. > Having buttons in all corners may make it appear more balanced visually Or more overloaded, with no visual resting space. And like that it's easy to see instantly that "there is nothing useful here when writing" rather than having to interpret a list of icons. > Perhaps a middle solution (because having the full description about timelines makes it a little heavy) would be to keep the icon, and also have a button that says "Visibility:". Then have the details about timelines etc in the options of the drop down menu. That would probably be enough to draw the attention of users - I mean it's an icon and it says Visibility, if you care about visibility options for your post just click it. Having just the icon like now may make it pass unnoticable 👍
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅

Yeah, I agree - actually, if Free is in the mood to mess with this too, perhaps it could expand up to a point! Like, rn it only fits 5 lines by default. When you go to the 6th line, it creates a scroll bar. It would be great if instead it expanded the box up to a point, like for example from the 6th to the 15th lines added, and it created the scrollbar from the 16th onwards.

> Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅 Yeah, I agree - actually, if Free is in the mood to mess with this too, perhaps it could expand up to a point! Like, rn it only fits 5 lines by default. When you go to the 6th line, it creates a scroll bar. It would be great if instead it expanded the box up to a point, like for example from the 6th to the 15th lines added, and it created the scrollbar from the 16th onwards.

Couldn't this be dependant of the screen space instead ? I would feel frustrated if it was restricted (too much) to a fraction of the screen space.
And it would be limited to screen space anyway, wouldn't it ?

Couldn't this be dependant of the screen space instead ? I would feel frustrated if it was restricted (too much) to a fraction of the screen space. And it would be limited to screen space anyway, wouldn't it ?
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

It wouldn't be restricted, you will still be able to adjust the length of the window, like now. My basic concern is that it shouldn't take up the whole screen because the space underneath is also useful (attachments are displayed there, emojis, the preview etc). So it should automatically expand up to like half the screen, and then you'd have to do it manually if you need a different size.

It wouldn't be restricted, you will still be able to adjust the length of the window, like now. My basic concern is that it shouldn't take up the whole screen because the space underneath is also useful (attachments are displayed there, emojis, the preview etc). So it should automatically expand up to like half the screen, and then you'd have to do it manually if you need a different size.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

OK, here's another - again, don't mind the crappy sketch and the poorly designed buttons, this is just for the layout and what goes where. It could be something like that:

image

OK, here's another - again, don't mind the crappy sketch and the poorly designed buttons, this is just for the layout and what goes where. It could be something like that: ![image](/attachments/8bd1b43f-70a2-45ad-bda3-fd5c7efe1b6d)
Poster
Collaborator

On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner:

image

I think I'm preferring this, but also with the display name

Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅

Yeah, I agree - actually, if Free is in the mood to mess with this too, perhaps it could expand up to a point! Like, rn it only fits 5 lines by default. When you go to the 6th line, it creates a scroll bar. It would be great if instead it expanded the box up to a point, like for example from the 6th to the 15th lines added, and it created the scrollbar from the 16th onwards.

It shouldn't be hard to set the max-height of the textbox to something like 80vh, which is of the viewport height

> On second thought, we could also indeed keep the character count below, to make the top look cleaner: > > ![image](/attachments/50b7f05a-b932-45f4-b4f9-42693e749591) I think I'm preferring this, but also with the display name > > Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. By the way to box not expanding is really not handy for long writings 😅 > > Yeah, I agree - actually, if Free is in the mood to mess with this too, perhaps it could expand up to a point! Like, rn it only fits 5 lines by default. When you go to the 6th line, it creates a scroll bar. It would be great if instead it expanded the box up to a point, like for example from the 6th to the 15th lines added, and it created the scrollbar from the 16th onwards. It shouldn't be hard to set the max-height of the textbox to something like `80vh`, which is of the viewport height

OK, here's another - again, don't mind the crappy sketch and the poorly designed buttons, this is just for the layout and what goes where. It could be something like that:

image

It looks neat compared to the current one :)

Maybe the drop-down arrow could be removed if you are not logged in several accounts ? It reduces discoverability of the feature (not sure it's important here ?) but reduces clutter.

I'm also worrying that the bottom icon list might be a little confusing. The icons are nice but not 100% explicit at first sight, and the size of the list and similarity (same monochrome look) of the icons doesn't help to distinguish them that much.

> OK, here's another - again, don't mind the crappy sketch and the poorly designed buttons, this is just for the layout and what goes where. It could be something like that: > > ![image](/attachments/8bd1b43f-70a2-45ad-bda3-fd5c7efe1b6d) It looks neat compared to the current one :) Maybe the drop-down arrow could be removed if you are not logged in several accounts ? It reduces discoverability of the feature (not sure it's important here ?) but reduces clutter. I'm also worrying that the bottom icon list might be a little confusing. The icons are nice but not 100% explicit at first sight, and the size of the list and similarity (same monochrome look) of the icons doesn't help to distinguish them that much.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Maybe the drop-down arrow could be removed if you are not logged in several accounts ? It reduces discoverability of the feature (not sure it's important here ?) but reduces clutter.

Yep, already said that in one of the posts above =) Dropdown for users should only be visible when you have 2 or more accounts logged in.

I'm also worrying that the bottom icon list might be a little confusing. The icons are nice but not 100% explicit at first sight, and the size of the list and similarity (same monochrome look) of the icons doesn't help to distinguish them that much.

You do have a point. We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works - that's what facebook does too. But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options. Perhaps this could also be something we could do - show the most used ones, like Attachments, Reactions etc and make others like Polls, MFM cheatsheet etc collapsible. This would also reduce visual clutter.

> Maybe the drop-down arrow could be removed if you are not logged in several accounts ? It reduces discoverability of the feature (not sure it's important here ?) but reduces clutter. Yep, already said that in one of the posts above =) Dropdown for users should only be visible when you have 2 or more accounts logged in. > I'm also worrying that the bottom icon list might be a little confusing. The icons are nice but not 100% explicit at first sight, and the size of the list and similarity (same monochrome look) of the icons doesn't help to distinguish them that much. You do have a point. We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works - that's what facebook does too. But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options. Perhaps this could also be something we could do - show the most used ones, like Attachments, Reactions etc and make others like Polls, MFM cheatsheet etc collapsible. This would also reduce visual clutter.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

You do have a point. We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works - that's what facebook does too. But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options. Perhaps this could also be something we could do - show the most used ones, like Attachments, Reactions etc and make others like Polls, MFM cheatsheet etc collapsible. This would also reduce visual clutter.

Quick, shitty mockup for that:

image

If we decide to do it like this, we could do an official multiple choice poll with a fedi post, to see which 4-5 icons users use more often and they feel are more necessary to have them visible/accessible by default.

> You do have a point. We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works - that's what facebook does too. But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options. Perhaps this could also be something we could do - show the most used ones, like Attachments, Reactions etc and make others like Polls, MFM cheatsheet etc collapsible. This would also reduce visual clutter. Quick, shitty mockup for that: ![image](/attachments/64f85f2b-7210-4835-aeab-2b846bd9d887) If we decide to do it like this, we could do an official multiple choice poll with a fedi post, to see which 4-5 icons users use more often and they feel are more necessary to have them visible/accessible by default.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Oh and something like this could also solve the widget posting form limited space issue, like instead of having another line visible by default, it could only appear when you hit the three dots.

Oh and something like this could also solve the widget posting form limited space issue, like instead of having another line visible by default, it could only appear when you hit the three dots.

We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works

I don't think it's a good idea for these reasons:

  • it won't work for everyone, as those colours (and contrast) need to be accessible. If they are not, it's either not adding anything for colour-blind people (leaving them with the previous issue), or removing the readability if the contrast is too low
  • it's very hard to theme them (including the previous point)
  • maybe it adds even more clutter (the "circus" argument :D)

But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options

I believe it's much better like this ! The 2 least used icons are hidden, but not that far, and it reduces the clutter a lot !
Having only 4 (mains) icons to read and remember is a lot easier.

show the most used ones

One warning here: don't do that on the basis of users habits (except if they can configure it manually). If the order change from time to time (or from one account to another) it makes it a lot more confusing, harder to share in tutorials and so on.

> We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works I don't think it's a good idea for these reasons: - it won't work for everyone, as those colours (and contrast) need to be accessible. If they are not, it's either not adding anything for colour-blind people (leaving them with the previous issue), or removing the readability if the contrast is too low - it's very hard to theme them (including the previous point) - maybe it adds even more clutter (the "circus" argument :D) > But they only dispay 5 and then give a "..." for more options I believe it's much better like this ! The 2 least used icons are hidden, but not that far, and it reduces the clutter a lot ! Having only 4 (mains) icons to read and remember is a lot easier. > show the most used ones One warning here: don't do that on the basis of users habits (except if they can configure it manually). If the order change from time to time (or from one account to another) it makes it a lot more confusing, harder to share in tutorials and so on.

I agree that icons shouldn't be colorized, especially since themes wouldn't be able to support that fully

I agree that icons shouldn't be colorized, especially since themes wouldn't be able to support that fully
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works

I don't think it's a good idea for these reasons:

  • it won't work for everyone, as those colours (and contrast) need to be accessible. If they are not, it's either not adding anything for colour-blind people (leaving them with the previous issue), or removing the readability if the contrast is too low
  • it's very hard to theme them (including the previous point)
  • maybe it adds even more clutter (the "circus" argument :D)

It was a suggestion based on what you said about the icons being too similar because they have the "same monochrome look" though - the way to fix monochrome is to add colour :p
I'm also not a fan of the idea stylistically, but in general it is a legit way to make different icons more distinguishable, and that's why facebook does it. It wouldn't affect colourblind people negatively, as even in extreme cases they would still see there are different shades. But that's just for the sake of the argument, we're keeping the monochrome look.

show the most used ones

One warning here: don't do that on the basis of users habits (except if they can configure it manually). If the order change from time to time (or from one account to another) it makes it a lot more confusing, harder to share in tutorials and so on.

Yea no worries, that's not what I meant, I meant we could find the most popular ones through a fedi poll and then keep those as default. User definable would be the best, like with emojis for example, but it might be too much work to be worth it. But I think that Hashtags, Mentions and the Cheatsheet could probably be collapsible in order to not overload it with icons. We're already using the three dots under every post anyway in the timelines etc, we don't display everything there either, no need to do it in the compose box.

> > We could experiment with giving them different colours I guess. It would look like a circus, but if it works, it works > > I don't think it's a good idea for these reasons: > - it won't work for everyone, as those colours (and contrast) need to be accessible. If they are not, it's either not adding anything for colour-blind people (leaving them with the previous issue), or removing the readability if the contrast is too low > - it's very hard to theme them (including the previous point) > - maybe it adds even more clutter (the "circus" argument :D) It was a suggestion based on what you said about the icons being too similar because they have the "same monochrome look" though - the way to fix monochrome is to add colour :p I'm also not a fan of the idea stylistically, but in general it is a legit way to make different icons more distinguishable, and that's why facebook does it. It wouldn't affect colourblind people negatively, as even in extreme cases they would still see there are different shades. But that's just for the sake of the argument, we're keeping the monochrome look. > > show the most used ones > > One warning here: don't do that on the basis of users habits (except if they can configure it manually). If the order change from time to time (or from one account to another) it makes it a lot more confusing, harder to share in tutorials and so on. Yea no worries, that's not what I meant, I meant we could find the most popular ones through a fedi poll and then keep those as default. User definable would be the best, like with emojis for example, but it might be too much work to be worth it. But I think that Hashtags, Mentions and the Cheatsheet could probably be collapsible in order to not overload it with icons. We're already using the three dots under every post anyway in the timelines etc, we don't display everything there either, no need to do it in the compose box.

It was a suggestion based on what you said about the icons being too similar because they have the "same monochrome look" though - the way to fix monochrome is to add colour :p

I just meant that this was a too similar list of "things", adding colour isn't the only solution 😅
Your proposal is much better :)

User definable would be the best, like with emojis for example, but it might be too much work to be worth it.

I think so too, and it's likely that good default settings (and I suppose the one in your proposal is the one) will meet 90% of use cases.

> It was a suggestion based on what you said about the icons being too similar because they have the "same monochrome look" though - the way to fix monochrome is to add colour :p I just meant that this was a too similar list of "things", adding colour isn't the only solution 😅 Your proposal is much better :) > User definable would be the best, like with emojis for example, but it might be too much work to be worth it. I think so too, and it's likely that good default settings (and I suppose the one in your proposal is the one) will meet 90% of use cases.
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

TBH a poll might not be needed, because realistically, most users who want to add a hashtag or a mention will just type # or @ and go from there by just typing. And the cheatsheet is useful but it's supposed to be used either until you memorize the MFM you use more often, or on the occasion you need something you don't remember because you don't use it often. Attachments, polls and CW need the button to function, and emojis is probably the most used one. So plain logic says that we could probably just keep these four, and hide the other three under the three dots, and by doing this gain more than we lose (gain a cleaner, more compact layout, more distinguishable buttons since they would be fewer - vs the slight inconvenience of one extra click once in a while).

TBH a poll might not be needed, because realistically, most users who want to add a hashtag or a mention will just type # or @ and go from there by just typing. And the cheatsheet is useful but it's supposed to be used either until you memorize the MFM you use more often, or on the occasion you need something you don't remember because you don't use it often. Attachments, polls and CW *need* the button to function, and emojis is probably the most used one. So plain logic says that we could probably just keep these four, and hide the other three under the three dots, and by doing this gain more than we lose (gain a cleaner, more compact layout, more distinguishable buttons since they would be fewer - vs the slight inconvenience of one extra click once in a while).

because realistically, most users who want to add a hashtag or a mention will just type # or @ and go from there by just typing.

That's my point, thanks for putting it way more clearly.

> because realistically, most users who want to add a hashtag or a mention will just type # or @ and go from there by just typing. That's my point, thanks for putting it way more clearly.
Collaborator

hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version:
image

why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid
having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :)

hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version: ![image](/attachments/426a1970-96ee-4728-b768-e5f4b966c3bb) why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :)
440 KiB
Collaborator

first one would work too, but then youd need to move the page icon down too, and that would clutter the buttons at the bottom

first one would work too, but then youd need to move the page icon down too, and that would clutter the buttons at the bottom
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version:
why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid
having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :)

I know it's a long read, but if you want take a look at the last suggestion - I'm reuploading without colours. I think "KISS" applies much more to this one, as it's far less cluttered and busy:

image

> hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version: > why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid > having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :) I know it's a long read, but if you want take a look at the last suggestion - I'm reuploading without colours. I think "KISS" applies much more to this one, as it's far less cluttered and busy: ![image](/attachments/b7370f1a-d4e0-4c67-a4ef-93d23f70e9a7)
Collaborator

hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version:
why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid
having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :)

I know it's a long read, but if you want take a look at the last suggestion - I'm reuploading without colours. I think "KISS" applies much more to this one, as it's far less cluttered and busy:

image

this works but the spacing is way off, visibility would need to be on the right, to fill the gap, its about having each button as far appart from each other, and still logically grouped, as possible, at least for my autism.

> > hey, I didnt read all of that here, but as someone concerned about accessibility, and who is mentally disabled itself, I recommend this second version: > > why? KISS: Keep it simple, stupid > > having this spacing is IDEAL imo, cause you have visual areas defining different things, and things are less cluttered together, giving you a better overview, :) > > I know it's a long read, but if you want take a look at the last suggestion - I'm reuploading without colours. I think "KISS" applies much more to this one, as it's far less cluttered and busy: > > ![image](/attachments/b7370f1a-d4e0-4c67-a4ef-93d23f70e9a7) this works but the spacing is way off, visibility would need to be on the right, to fill the gap, its about having each button as far appart from each other, and still logically grouped, as possible, at least for my autism.
Poster
Collaborator

Moving things to corners is usually best for design, as well lol

Moving things to corners is usually best for design, as well lol
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

this works but the spacing is way off, visibility would need to be on the right, to fill the gap, its about having each button as far appart from each other, and still logically grouped, as possible, at least for my autism.

Sure, we could have more space between user and visibility (but I think we also wanna keep it far from X). But we can try putting Visibility closer to X, I'm not strongly against it.

I think the rest of the stuff has been addressed pretty well, there is a logic behind the grouping:

Top is: Who posts, to whom the post is visible.
Bottom left are the most used buttons, with less used ones under ... to avoid clutter - just like under posts.
Finally, bottom right is stuff before you post: Character count to make sure you're within the limit as your text gets longer, then Preview to make sure it will be displayed like you want it, and finally Post button.

Seems like a pretty logical grouping to me, if there are other ideas though lets hear them =)

> this works but the spacing is way off, visibility would need to be on the right, to fill the gap, its about having each button as far appart from each other, and still logically grouped, as possible, at least for my autism. Sure, we could have more space between user and visibility (but I think we also wanna keep it far from X). But we can try putting Visibility closer to X, I'm not strongly against it. I think the rest of the stuff has been addressed pretty well, there is a logic behind the grouping: Top is: Who posts, to whom the post is visible. Bottom left are the most used buttons, with less used ones under ... to avoid clutter - just like under posts. Finally, bottom right is stuff before you post: Character count to make sure you're within the limit as your text gets longer, then Preview to make sure it will be displayed like you want it, and finally Post button. Seems like a pretty logical grouping to me, if there are other ideas though lets hear them =)
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Eh, what the hell, if it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing :P

One with visibility further from the user selector

image

And one with visibility closer to X

image

I think I prefer the first one, but I'm cool with both.

Eh, what the hell, if it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing :P One with visibility further from the user selector ![image](/attachments/730959bf-b8bd-41d4-a0b1-a2e9af08eb1e) And one with visibility closer to X ![image](/attachments/6da05cf8-6647-45cc-ae17-40a430856316) I think I prefer the first one, but I'm cool with both.

I'm not sure about the visibility selector being on the top right.
I feel like it gives is less weight by being too close to the X, while it's a pretty important setting.

I'd be more into making the top bar separated in 3 zones : account, visibility, X close button, with roughly similar spacing. Visibility would be centered in that case (no offset to the left such as in the 1rst proposal), which gives it more weight and I believe it's a good thing. Would that be possible for you to make that third version please ? 🙏

I'm not sure about the visibility selector being on the top right. I feel like it gives is less weight by being too close to the X, while it's a pretty important setting. I'd be more into making the top bar separated in 3 zones : account, visibility, X close button, with roughly similar spacing. Visibility would be centered in that case (no offset to the left such as in the 1rst proposal), which gives it more weight and I believe it's a good thing. Would that be possible for you to make that third version please ? 🙏
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

@Lapineige I think that because these are very rough sketches it doesn't make much sense to look too much into details at this point, as the final design of the buttons will for sure be different, so it won't look exactly like that. So we're gathering ideas and opinions here, and then I'll be keeping up with Freeplay on the implementation of this, taking into account this discussion =)

@Lapineige I think that because these are very rough sketches it doesn't make much sense to look too much into details at this point, as the final design of the buttons will for sure be different, so it won't look exactly like that. So we're gathering ideas and opinions here, and then I'll be keeping up with Freeplay on the implementation of this, taking into account this discussion =)
panos commented 3 months ago
Owner

Wanna mention #9411 here, if we're redesigning the posting form, would be nice to also fix Preview =)

Wanna mention #9411 here, if we're redesigning the posting form, would be nice to also fix Preview =)

@Lapineige I think that because these are very rough sketches it doesn't make much sense to look too much into details at this point, as the final design of the buttons will for sure be different, so it won't look exactly like that. So we're gathering ideas and opinions here, and then I'll be keeping up with Freeplay on the implementation of this, taking into account this discussion =)

I understand your concern. Yet I was mainly talking about button positioning and the overall structure of that redaction pop-up, and I believe it makes a difference (even if we've got the idea without the image, I suppose), but I agree this might be fine-tune details that could be dealt with at the very end.

> @Lapineige I think that because these are very rough sketches it doesn't make much sense to look too much into details at this point, as the final design of the buttons will for sure be different, so it won't look exactly like that. So we're gathering ideas and opinions here, and then I'll be keeping up with Freeplay on the implementation of this, taking into account this discussion =) I understand your concern. Yet I was mainly talking about button positioning and the overall structure of that redaction pop-up, and I believe it makes a difference (even if we've got the idea without the image, I suppose), but I agree this might be fine-tune details that could be dealt with at the very end.

I've just got a small suggestion: for the Visibility selection, how about simplifying the labels to "Federated", "Local", "Unlisted", "Private" (or something like this). Reducing the label to a single word should be (a) more precise, and (b) reduce the space needed - which might make it easier to fit in both the pop-up and widget.

I've just got a small suggestion: for the Visibility selection, how about simplifying the labels to "Federated", "Local", "Unlisted", "Private" (or something like this). Reducing the label to a single word should be (a) more precise, and (b) reduce the space needed - which might make it easier to fit in both the pop-up and widget.
Poster
Collaborator

Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means, which was why I did it the way I did

I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline

Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means, which was why I did it the way I did > I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline
Poster
Collaborator

Plus it's sort of similar to how Twitter already does it
image

Plus it's sort of similar to how Twitter already does it ![image](/attachments/fa5fc849-36ce-4022-912d-9eba9b23bde2)
8.9 KiB

Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means,

And in particular newcomers, and as "Federated" is the default, and possibly the most problematic option (more visibility), it's best if one make sure everyone will understand it right away even without some fediverse literacy.

> Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means, And in particular newcomers, and as "Federated" is the default, and possibly the most problematic option (more visibility), it's best if one make sure everyone will understand it right away even without some fediverse literacy.
panos commented 2 months ago
Owner

The problem is just that visibility is not only defined by the timelines the post will be visible in, it's actually two factors: To whom it will be visible, and in which timelines. From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines. And "Everone can see" isn't useful here because it can apply to both Global and Home, as both produce public posts. So I think it would be best to just keep the current one-word names, make the names visible to bring attention to the setting (display "Visibily: Global" and the icon, instead of just the icon as it currently does), and then in the drop down menu be more specific and detailed.

The problem is just that visibility is not only defined by the timelines the post will be visible in, it's actually two factors: To whom it will be visible, and in which timelines. From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines. And "Everone can see" isn't useful here because it can apply to both Global and Home, as both produce public posts. So I think it would be best to just keep the current one-word names, make the names visible to bring attention to the setting (display "Visibily: Global" and the icon, instead of just the icon as it currently does), and then in the drop down menu be more specific and detailed.

Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means, which was why I did it the way I did

I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline

I was using "federated" as an example. The precise terminology could be different... Maybe "global" instead of "federated"?

The problem with the way Twitter does things is they aren't in a distributed environment. Saying "Everyone can reply" doesn't quite fit: who is everyone? Everyone in the Fediverse? Everyone in your local instance? Everyone who follows you?

IMO - trying to be too verbose is going to get in the way of making the design effective and friction-less for the user.

But - that's just my opinion.

I think @panos and I are on the same wavelength.

> Some might not know what 'Federated' immediately means, which was why I did it the way I did > > > I wanted to make the visibility selector more noticeable, in case people don't want to spam the federated timelines with their stuff and aren't aware of the federated timeline I was using "federated" as an example. The precise terminology could be different... Maybe "global" instead of "federated"? The problem with the way Twitter does things is they aren't in a distributed environment. Saying "Everyone can reply" doesn't quite fit: who is everyone? Everyone in the Fediverse? Everyone in your local instance? Everyone who follows you? IMO - trying to be too verbose is going to get in the way of making the design effective and friction-less for the user. But - that's just my opinion. I think @panos and I are on the same wavelength.

The problem is just that visibility is not only defined by the timelines the post will be visible in, it's actually two factors: To whom it will be visible, and in which timelines.

But the timeline factor isn't software-agnostic : depending on the "client" software (the software the reader instance is using) this might change. Hence I believe it's best to priorities the first factor (who can read it) and second in which kind of timeline.
For the option "publicly visible, but not in federated and hashtags TLs", the "Unlisted" wording (used in Mastodon for instance) is nice because it states that it's accessible (visible in some way) by everyone, but not listed in federated TLs, but it isn't clear right away to newcomers (and sometimes older users).

Anyway regarding working, for such complex options a "one word"/"very short sentence" solution will never be accurate enough, but regarding what's the best (=least worst) solution I believe it mainly need user testing with a set of possibilities and with completely newcomers and recent-but-not-that-noob-users to test this… as experienced fediverse users we can't imagine correctly how they will understand those labeling and behave accordingly :)

From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines

I'm not sure to understand : what are the limited TLs ?

So I think it would be best to just keep the current one-word names, make the names visible to bring attention to the setting (display "Visibily: Global" and the icon, instead of just the icon as it currently does), and then in the drop down menu be more specific and detailed.

I'm not sure this would exclude better wordings for the button label, but clearly this would be an improvement in clarity.

> The problem is just that visibility is not only defined by the timelines the post will be visible in, it's actually two factors: To whom it will be visible, and in which timelines. But the timeline factor isn't software-agnostic : depending on the "client" software (the software the reader instance is using) this might change. Hence I believe it's best to priorities the first factor (who can read it) and second in which kind of timeline. For the option "publicly visible, but not in federated and hashtags TLs", the "Unlisted" wording (used in Mastodon for instance) is nice because it states that it's accessible (visible in some way) by everyone, but not listed in federated TLs, but it isn't clear right away to newcomers (and sometimes older users). Anyway regarding working, for such complex options a "one word"/"very short sentence" solution will never be accurate enough, but regarding what's the best (=least worst) solution I believe it mainly need user testing with a set of possibilities and with completely newcomers and recent-but-not-that-noob-users to test this… as experienced fediverse users we can't imagine correctly how they will understand those labeling and behave accordingly :) > From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines I'm not sure to understand : what are the limited TLs ? > So I think it would be best to just keep the current one-word names, make the names visible to bring attention to the setting (display "Visibily: Global" and the icon, instead of just the icon as it currently does), and then in the drop down menu be more specific and detailed. I'm not sure this would exclude better wordings for the button label, but clearly this would be an improvement in clarity.
panos commented 2 months ago
Owner

From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines

I'm not sure to understand : what are the limited TLs ?

I mean both Global and Followers are displayed in all timelines. Home posts are the only ones that are unlisted/not displayed in Local/Global, and limited to Home and Social.

> > From the three public/semipublic choices (Global, Home, Followers) only Home is displayed in limited timelines > > I'm not sure to understand : what are the limited TLs ? I mean both Global and Followers are displayed in all timelines. Home posts are the only ones that are unlisted/not displayed in Local/Global, and limited to Home and Social.

Anyway regarding working, for such complex options a "one word"/"very short sentence" solution will never be accurate enough,

I think this can be addressed by taking a page from Mastodon again... Their drop down for the view selection has short descriptions for each option:

image

Using a one word label should be enough to hint to the user that there are more options, while the drop-down menu can add clarity to the choices.

> Anyway regarding working, for such complex options a "one word"/"very short sentence" solution will never be accurate enough, I think this can be addressed by taking a page from Mastodon again... Their drop down for the view selection has short descriptions for each option: ![image](/attachments/5aa5a098-d768-4e7f-a115-69c2829ac313) Using a one word label should be enough to hint to the user that there are more options, while the drop-down menu can add clarity to the choices.
panos commented 2 months ago
Owner

Actually, since "Home" posts are also displayed in Social (so they are not "Home only") which can be confusing, I'd argue that "Unlisted" is more descriptive and easier to understand than "Home".

Actually, since "Home" posts are also displayed in Social (so they are not "Home only") which can be confusing, I'd argue that "Unlisted" is more descriptive and easier to understand than "Home".
Freeplay changed title from Posting form layout to Posting / compose form layout 2 months ago
panos commented 1 month ago
Owner

One more thing I've been thinking and want to keep a note of here, for future reference: When you have preview on, it shouldn't appear between the text area and the line of buttons, instead the line of buttons should appear in between. Especially if you're writing a long post, it's inconvenient to have your posting tools after the preview, you need that stuck right under the text area.

One more thing I've been thinking and want to keep a note of here, for future reference: When you have preview on, it shouldn't appear between the text area and the line of buttons, instead the line of buttons should appear in between. Especially if you're writing a long post, it's inconvenient to have your posting tools after the preview, you need that stuck right under the text area.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No Assignees
7 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: calckey/calckey#9726
Loading…
There is no content yet.